Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Share
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6083
    Points : 6187
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  PapaDragon on 12/05/17, 08:39 am

    kvs wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:Any new carrier will be using naval version of 5th gen fighter that will be produced for UAE

    The moment thy announced that project all other platforms for future carrier took a back seat

    Sounds like PAK FA was produce for India.   Russia will not be making anything for a collection of Wahhabis.
    It might sell them some variant of something it makes for itself, though.

    UAE will get exactly the product that is defined in the contract

    However, derivative of that same product that Russia will develop and build for itself will be something else entirely

    Something like early Su-30MKI versus latest Su-30SM only even more different
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17200
    Points : 17806
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  GarryB on 12/05/17, 01:42 pm

    Building a carrier is nothing like building an SSN or SSBN.

    A carriers operational costs are enormous in comparison and require a fleet of vessels with decent air defence capability to operate with them.

    Having said that there is no substitute for air power... whether on land or at sea in terms of attack and defence.

    There is no point in Russia building 2-3 carriers even now as when they would be ready there would be no ships to operate with them.

    A new carrier in the mid 2020s would be a useful addition and another of the same class at the end of the 2020s would be a good step for them... by then they should have a young small ship fleet and a new mid to heavy fleet, with frigates in service in numbers and destroyer/cruiser sized vessels coming into service in numbers too.

    Right now a MiG-29K2 and Su-33 would be superior to 90% of the worlds air forces, with the support of a cruiser and a few destroyers.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1195
    Points : 1193
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Isos on 12/05/17, 03:08 pm

    First you need to learn the difference between marketing and capabilities. PESA radar is a concentration of energy into one spot while AESA is multiple elements operating separately. In the end, energy input is what matters and you will end up with same performance. Issue with AESA and all those elements is that they end up having an average failure rate at around 10% or greater during operation so you are not getting full potential at all times. There are AESA advantages but not worth it.

    You are also reading up on old N001 radar. Medo would correct you. If operating n001 vep it would have a detection range of roughly 300km for fighter aircraft. As well, F-18 sh isn't 1m^2

    Tell that to all the air forces that are buying AESA instead of PESA if you think AESA is not worth it ...

    I didn't check but Su-33 are not equiped with last N001. So they have the old one. While SuperHornets have their AESA and have low rcs.


    Right now a MiG-29K2 and Su-33 would be superior to 90% of the worlds air forces, with the support of a cruiser and a few destroyers.

    Not realy for Su-33. Most Asian countries have Su-30Mk.. European countries have Rafale, typhoon. Arab countries have mix of modern F-15 rafale and typhoons. Mig-29k can compete but not the sukhoi unless it gets a modern powerfull radar and a big modernization.

    UAE will get exactly the product that is defined in the contract

    However, derivative of that same product that Russia will develop and build for itself will be something else entirely

    Something like early Su-30MKI versus latest Su-30SM only even more different

    Pantsir was financed by UAE and then used by Russian IIRC. However it will take time to finish it.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1822
    Points : 1820
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  miketheterrible on 12/05/17, 07:20 pm

    ISOS,

    AESA is getting funded because of newer technology available plus the amount US already put into it since the 80's.  You have very little clue.  Please do some research on AESA vs PESA.  Learn Physics as well.  Energy Input = Energy Output.  AESA doesn't do magic and breaks laws of physics. It can break up its source of scan to multiple parts to increase angles and decrease scan time, at a cost of reducing range because it isn't concentrating on one source. PESA has slower scan rate because it is 1 source scanning at all time. Irbis-E as an example is PESA (hybrid actually) with a massive detecting range because of its power input. You can get same range and all from AESA with same amount of power required.

    Russia working on AESA because now T/R modules are becoming cheaper to produce. But funny enough, no AESA is in operation in Russia besides test beds. Wonder why? Probably because the PESA technology is still advanced for Russia and still operating as needed. Since radars like Irbis-E is still one of the best in the world.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1195
    Points : 1193
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Isos on 12/05/17, 07:39 pm


    I did look for the difference and (even if I didn't look in details) AESA is better, have better range, more resistant to ECM, can do more things, low probability of intercept.

    Even sputnik released a comparison between Su-35 radar and F-15 radar and said the F-15 radar is better.

    I'm not saying it's magic.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html

    In many respects an AESA is a fighter radar designer's dream device, since it not only vastly improves performance and functional capabilities, but does so with improved reliability and complete digital control of antenna/transmitter functions. Over the life of an AESA radar, progressive refinements in many aspects of antenna behaviour can be incorporated through incremental software upgrades. Software programmable AESAs at this time largely implement digital equivalents of established antenna beam shapes, scan patterns and sidelobe behaviours. Over time with proper intellectual effort, further improvements are possible.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1822
    Points : 1820
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  miketheterrible on 12/05/17, 07:52 pm

    Isos wrote:
    I did look for the difference and (even if I didn't look in details) AESA is better, have better range, more resistant to ECM, can do more things, low probability of intercept.

    Even sputnik released a comparison between Su-35 radar and F-15 radar and said the F-15 radar is better.

    I'm not saying it's magic.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html

    In many respects an AESA is a fighter radar designer's dream device, since it not only vastly improves performance and functional capabilities, but does so with improved reliability and complete digital control of antenna/transmitter functions. Over the life of an AESA radar, progressive refinements in many aspects of antenna behaviour can be incorporated through incremental software upgrades. Software programmable AESAs at this time largely implement digital equivalents of established antenna beam shapes, scan patterns and sidelobe behaviours. Over time with proper intellectual effort, further improvements are possible.

    A very important person I know, will also tell you about AESA being rather poor in reliability as Canada spent massive amounts on upgrading ground based radar to AESA.  It made his job very difficult when monitoring the radars installation and use.

    Also, it cannot have magic range increase.  It won't.  It is once again energy input = energy output.  Hence why Irbis-E can detect targest and track at ranges up to 400km while F-15's cannot but close.

    This is an exert from one of Carl Kopps comments of Irbis-E as example:

    The available data and modelling thus easily supports the proposition that the APG-79 is a 20 kW peak power class radar, with the caveat that better performance is theoretically achievable, as is lower performance given the technology available. With around one half the aperture area of the BARS and Irbis E radars, the resulting order of magnitude power aperture product of 38 dBWm2 puts the radar almost exactly in between the two Russian designs. If we are generous with assumptions and consider growth potential, then it might be rated a little closer to the Irbis E.

    It is also worth asking the question of what peak power rating the APG-79 would require to match the 40.8 dBWm2 power aperture product of the Irbis E, given that its aperture is around half the area of the Flanker radar. The result is a considerable 35 kW - reflecting the reality that half the antenna size requires twice the peak power to match a power aperture figure. Is such performance feasible? The per transistor module rating is then 32 Watts, which is feasible but quite challenging. The peak radiant power density at the face of the antenna is 8 W/cm2 which is around twice the cited current state of the art. The HEMTs would have to be state of the art, but basically such peak power performance is pushing against the capacity of the extant cooling system, and achievable transistor performance in efficiency and power output.

    Claims that the APG-79 can outrange the Irbis E are very difficult to support given basic radar physics. A claim of a tactically significant range advantage over the extant BARS is also hard to support. The corollary of this is that a late model F-35 Joint Strike Fighter APG-81 with similar module count, module power and aperture size to the APG-79 will not provide significantly different performance, relative to the later Russian radars.

    Notice how he mentions power usage a lot?
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1195
    Points : 1193
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Isos on 12/05/17, 08:06 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    I did look for the difference and (even if I didn't look in details) AESA is better, have better range, more resistant to ECM, can do more things, low probability of intercept.

    Even sputnik released a comparison between Su-35 radar and F-15 radar and said the F-15 radar is better.

    I'm not saying it's magic.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html

    In many respects an AESA is a fighter radar designer's dream device, since it not only vastly improves performance and functional capabilities, but does so with improved reliability and complete digital control of antenna/transmitter functions. Over the life of an AESA radar, progressive refinements in many aspects of antenna behaviour can be incorporated through incremental software upgrades. Software programmable AESAs at this time largely implement digital equivalents of established antenna beam shapes, scan patterns and sidelobe behaviours. Over time with proper intellectual effort, further improvements are possible.

    Carl Kopp isn't exactly reliable.

    A very important person I know, will also tell you about AESA being rather poor in reliability as Canada spent massive amounts on upgrading ground based radar to AESA.  It made his job very difficult when monitoring the radars installation and use.

    Also, it cannot have magic range increase.  It won't.  It is once again energy input = energy output.  Hence why Irbis-E can detect targest and track at ranges up to 400km while F-15's cannot but close.

    For technicla knowledge he is.

    AESA has its issues too. But irbis-E will be spotted at 800km by passive radar. Most BVR fights will occure at 50-70 km, these missile max range (120km for R-77-1 -160km for AMRAAM) are just marketing. All these radars will find the ennemy before it gets in range for a missile lunch. An aesa allows you to turn your radar all the way and use it for terrain mapping.

    But I agree that PESA is not outdated. For a fighter with a big rcs, it's useless to use an expensive stealth radar. It will be spotted at long ranges anyway. Better go for a powerfull radar. The mig-25's was the best in term of power. Maybe they should improve it.

    But if you are doing a LO fighter you need a steathy radar. Mig-29k is made with reduced rcs so if you put a doppler radar that's totaly stupid.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1822
    Points : 1820
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  miketheterrible on 12/05/17, 09:28 pm

    Isos wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    I did look for the difference and (even if I didn't look in details) AESA is better, have better range, more resistant to ECM, can do more things, low probability of intercept.

    Even sputnik released a comparison between Su-35 radar and F-15 radar and said the F-15 radar is better.

    I'm not saying it's magic.

    http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html

    In many respects an AESA is a fighter radar designer's dream device, since it not only vastly improves performance and functional capabilities, but does so with improved reliability and complete digital control of antenna/transmitter functions. Over the life of an AESA radar, progressive refinements in many aspects of antenna behaviour can be incorporated through incremental software upgrades. Software programmable AESAs at this time largely implement digital equivalents of established antenna beam shapes, scan patterns and sidelobe behaviours. Over time with proper intellectual effort, further improvements are possible.

    Carl Kopp isn't exactly reliable.

    A very important person I know, will also tell you about AESA being rather poor in reliability as Canada spent massive amounts on upgrading ground based radar to AESA.  It made his job very difficult when monitoring the radars installation and use.

    Also, it cannot have magic range increase.  It won't.  It is once again energy input = energy output.  Hence why Irbis-E can detect targest and track at ranges up to 400km while F-15's cannot but close.

    For technicla knowledge he is.

    AESA has its issues too. But irbis-E will be spotted at 800km by passive radar. Most BVR fights will occure at 50-70 km, these missile max range (120km for R-77-1 -160km for AMRAAM) are just marketing. All these radars will find the ennemy before it gets in range for a missile lunch. An aesa allows you to turn your radar all the way and use it for terrain mapping.

    But I agree that PESA is not outdated. For a fighter with a big rcs, it's useless to use an expensive stealth radar. It will be spotted at long ranges anyway. Better go for a powerfull radar. The mig-25's was the best in term of power. Maybe they should improve it.

    But if you are doing a LO fighter you need a steathy radar. Mig-29k is made with reduced rcs so if you put a doppler radar that's totaly stupid.

    AESA isn't stealth, you are aware how radiation works, right?  So long as it emits radiation, passive systems will pick it up.  PESA, AESA or any other type.  Su-35S also has passive systems to be able to detect radiation of all types.  It isn't just a "stealth" aircraft function you know.  There is no such thing as stealthy radar, stop listening to the really bad marketing.  Su-35S can use its FLIR system to scan while its Irbis is off.  Something a lot of US jets cannot do.

    Want to know why Russia isn't rushing for AESA? Because there is almost no benefits to that of Hybrid radar used. The rest for AESA, they are waiting for ROFAR which will be still a year or two away.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3279
    Points : 3365
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  medo on 12/05/17, 09:41 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:First you need to learn the difference between marketing and capabilities. PESA radar is a concentration of energy into one spot while AESA is multiple elements operating separately. In the end, energy input is what matters and you will end up with same performance. Issue with AESA and all those elements is that they end up having an average failure rate at around 10% or greater during operation so you are not getting full potential at all times.  There are AESA advantages but not worth it.

    You are also reading up on old N001 radar. Medo would correct you. If operating n001 vep it would have a detection range of roughly 300km for fighter aircraft. As well, F-18 sh isn't 1m^2

    N001VEP have range of 300 km against big planes and ships. It can detect F-16 fighter at the range of 160 km, what is still more than enough for the range of the missiles Su-30MK2 use.
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1822
    Points : 1820
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  miketheterrible on 12/05/17, 09:43 pm

    medo wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:First you need to learn the difference between marketing and capabilities. PESA radar is a concentration of energy into one spot while AESA is multiple elements operating separately. In the end, energy input is what matters and you will end up with same performance. Issue with AESA and all those elements is that they end up having an average failure rate at around 10% or greater during operation so you are not getting full potential at all times.  There are AESA advantages but not worth it.

    You are also reading up on old N001 radar. Medo would correct you. If operating n001 vep it would have a detection range of roughly 300km for fighter aircraft. As well, F-18 sh isn't 1m^2

    N001VEP have range of 300 km against big planes and ships. It can detect F-16 fighter at the range of 160 km, what is still more than enough for the range of the missiles Su-30MK2 use.

    thanks for the correction.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 587
    Points : 583
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Singular_Transform on 13/05/17, 03:34 pm

    GarryB wrote:Building a carrier is nothing like building an SSN or SSBN.

    A carriers operational costs are enormous in comparison and require a fleet of vessels with decent air defence capability to operate with them.

    Having said that there is no substitute for air power... whether on land or at sea in terms of attack and defence.

    There is no point in Russia building 2-3 carriers even now as when they would be ready there would be no ships to operate with them.

    A new carrier in the mid 2020s would be a useful addition and another of the same class at the end of the 2020s would be a good step for them... by then they should have a young small ship fleet and a new mid to heavy fleet, with frigates in service in numbers and destroyer/cruiser sized vessels coming into service in numbers too.

    Right now a MiG-29K2 and Su-33 would be superior to 90% of the worlds air forces, with the support of a cruiser and a few destroyers.

    It is relative

    The Kuz cost as much as a super carrier, but it can operate independently ,but it has only a small load of planes.


    There are certain compromises.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1469
    Points : 1468
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  AlfaT8 on 14/05/17, 01:58 am

    GarryB wrote:Building a carrier is nothing like building an SSN or SSBN.

    A carriers operational costs are enormous in comparison and require a fleet of vessels with decent air defence capability to operate with them.

    Having said that there is no substitute for air power... whether on land or at sea in terms of attack and defence.

    There is no point in Russia building 2-3 carriers even now as when they would be ready there would be no ships to operate with them.

    A new carrier in the mid 2020s would be a useful addition and another of the same class at the end of the 2020s would be a good step for them... by then they should have a young small ship fleet and a new mid to heavy fleet, with frigates in service in numbers and destroyer/cruiser sized vessels coming into service in numbers too.

    Right now a MiG-29K2 and Su-33 would be superior to 90% of the worlds air forces, with the support of a cruiser and a few destroyers.

    Not necessarily, we're talking about Russian ACs here so they would have some very solid air-defenses from the carrier itself, making the size of it's supposed escort fleet smaller compared to Western counterparts.

    From what i can see, sure, but what was the Soviet plan to counter carriers again?

    Makes sense, making new carriers now seems silly, since there are other ships to build that are of higher priority at the moment (Derzkiy,Gorshkov,Lider), although the exception would be helicopter carriers, like project Lavina.

    "90% of the world"!??

    Singular_Transform wrote: It is relative

    The Kuz cost as much as a super carrier, but it can operate independently ,but it has only a small load of planes.


    There are certain compromises.

    4/5Billion seems about right for a Carrier nowadays, although by today's standards that wouldn't be considered a "Super-Carrier" price (Q. Elizabeth: $8/9Bill and Ford $9/10Bill).
    I wouldn't call 50 aircraft small, even less so if your jets are all Mig-29Ks.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17200
    Points : 17806
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  GarryB on 14/05/17, 02:31 pm

    Tell that to all the air forces that are buying AESA instead of PESA if you think AESA is not worth it ...

    Very few countries in the world even had PESA... mainly the Russians/Soviets.

    For most of the world the move to AESA is huge because of the enormous advantages of electronic scanning... but for Russia they already had electronic scanning with PESA radars.

    A very good mature PESA would not be inferior in many parameters to a first generation immature AESA, but would be much much cheaper.

    Over time production will reduce costs and performance will improve considerably too, but there is no rush to change like you would going from conventional mechanically scanned radar to AESA.

    While SuperHornets have their AESA and have low rcs.

    Carrying weapons and fuel a Shornet is not that low observable.

    Not realy for Su-33. Most Asian countries have Su-30Mk.. European countries have Rafale, typhoon. Arab countries have mix of modern F-15 rafale and typhoons. Mig-29k can compete but not the sukhoi unless it gets a modern powerfull radar and a big modernization.

    Perhaps reading what I said again might help... it is not just Su-33s vs Su-30s or Rafales we are talking about. Su-33 operating with a ship carrying S-300 or S-400 and soon S-500 is no easy beat. Soon Redut and Shtil will be added in numbers too.

    Pantsir was financed by UAE and then used by Russian IIRC. However it will take time to finish it.

    Pantsir-S1 is operational. Pantsir-SM is in development and testing and will be in service soon if not already.

    Only the naval models are not in service.

    The Kuz cost as much as a super carrier, but it can operate independently ,but it has only a small load of planes.


    There are certain compromises.

    Kuz was cheap considering it was their first attempt at a real flattop.

    Russian and Soviet carrier designs are not comparable to western pieces of crap.

    Russia and the Soviets never relied totally on aircraft like the west does.

    Russian carriers will have comprehensive air defences including guns and missiles and other systems as well as aircraft.

    In comparison the west/US relies totally on its aircraft in both attack and defence.

    Russian systems will continue to use long range cruise missiles to attack both land and sea targets.

    Current missiles will be replaced by longer ranged much much faster missiles in the future.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Russian Patriot

    Posts : 1165
    Points : 2053
    Join date : 2009-07-21
    Age : 27
    Location : USA- although I am Russian

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Russian Patriot on 08/06/17, 05:08 am


    found this on youtube

    Firebird

    Posts : 959
    Points : 991
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Firebird on 09/06/17, 11:12 pm

    When people say "Russia is a land power and doesn't need lots of aircraft carriers" I think they miss the point.

    Look back 1990 and see how many carriers the USSR/Russia had or had planned. The Kuznetsov's class, its predecessor (total of 6 carriers) and the helicopter carriers (total of 2). And 3 Ulyanovsk carriers being planned or built in 1990. Fast forward to 2017 and it would be pretty similar to what the US has. There would also be Yak VTOL aircraft for these carriers and probably more helicopter carriers/amphibious assault ships to carry them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_Russia_and_the_Soviet_Union

    Look at the Syria situation. America planned to take over Syria and build pipelines across it. Thereby being able to force Europe to take Middle Eastern gas and not Russian gas. Russia uses the Kuznetsov as part of its efforts to settle Syria. But ofcourse the K isn't ideal for such a job. You could say the same about the defence of Serbia back in the 1990s. And many other examples.

    A maritime ability aids in land defence and it aids in the geopolitical aspects of a land power's abilities. So I wonder how long increased naval air power will take. Perhaps the first stage is a good sized fleet of heli carriers. After all Russia's naval top brass were clear in their views. Once subs start firing their missiles in a major conflict, they give away their position. And risk vulnerability to air/other attack.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 587
    Points : 583
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Singular_Transform on 10/06/17, 02:26 am

    What happens if Russia has more advnced submarine detection equipment than the helicopter carriers?

    Firebird

    Posts : 959
    Points : 991
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Firebird on 10/06/17, 02:55 pm

    Well the problem isn't detecting a major enemy's sub fleet.
    Its the fact that a major enemy's air power (choppers etc) could go hunting Russian subs after they've announced their position ie by firing large missile salvos. There's a quote by snr Russian naval top brass somewhere saying this.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 587
    Points : 583
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Singular_Transform on 11/06/17, 02:35 am

    Firebird wrote:Well the problem isn't detecting a major enemy's sub fleet.
    Its the fact that a major enemy's air power (choppers etc) could go hunting Russian subs after they've announced their position ie by firing large missile salvos. There's a quote by snr Russian naval top brass somewhere saying this.

    You can use long range SAM missiles to kill that helicopters.

    The anti sub platforms are helicopters and big airplanes usually, means nearly anything can shoot them down.

    But I think it is a cost / benefti analysis.

    You can distrribute the firepower between small ships, with medium (100-150km) missiles, or few big ship with long range missiles/aircrafts.

    Qestion is how much money you spend to cover the same area.

    But Russia has a big ice overed area, so the submarines are quite safe from anything practicaly.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1195
    Points : 1193
    Join date : 2015-11-07

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Isos on 11/06/17, 03:58 am

    Singular_Transform wrote:
    Firebird wrote:Well the problem isn't detecting a major enemy's sub fleet.
    Its the fact that a major enemy's air power (choppers etc) could go hunting Russian subs after they've announced their position ie by firing large missile salvos. There's a quote by snr Russian naval top brass somewhere saying this.

    You can use long range SAM missiles to kill that helicopters.

    The anti sub platforms are  helicopters and big airplanes usually, means nearly anything can shoot them down.

    But I think it is a cost / benefti analysis.

    You can distrribute the firepower between small ships, with medium (100-150km) missiles, or few big ship with long range missiles/aircrafts.

    Qestion is how much money you spend to cover the same area.

    But Russia has a big ice overed area, so the submarines are quite safe from anything practicaly.

    Helicopters can be detected by sonars, future sub will have modern air defence missiles with lock on after lunch capability an should be able to destroy helicopters from 20-30 km. German are already devloping one like that based on the IRST missile.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1922
    Points : 1947
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  eehnie on 29/06/17, 12:58 am

    Russia will have one Project 23000 aircraft carrier of 90000-100000 tons.

    Tsavo Lion posted two very interesting news

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6686p400-russian-navy-status-news-3#198032

    http://www.ng.ru/news/585912.html?print=Y
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ng.ru%2Fnews%2F585912.html%3Fprint%3DY

    https://utro.ru/articles/2017/06/28/1331900.shtml
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Futro.ru%2Farticles%2F2017%2F06%2F28%2F1331900.shtml

    The first unit of the Project 23000 will be included in the State Armament Program 2018-2025.
    avatar
    SeigSoloyvov

    Posts : 829
    Points : 833
    Join date : 2016-04-09

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  SeigSoloyvov on 29/06/17, 01:54 am

    eehnie wrote:Russia will have one Project 23000 aircraft carrier of 90000-100000 tons.

    Tsavo Lion posted two very interesting news

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6686p400-russian-navy-status-news-3#198032

    http://www.ng.ru/news/585912.html?print=Y
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ng.ru%2Fnews%2F585912.html%3Fprint%3DY

    https://utro.ru/articles/2017/06/28/1331900.shtml
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Futro.ru%2Farticles%2F2017%2F06%2F28%2F1331900.shtml

    The first unit of the Project 23000 will be included in the State Armament Program 2018-2025.

    No they are developing the plans by 2025. They will not start construction of the thing until at earliest 2027 and this thing would take a good decade going by Russi'a build rates to even hit the water.

    You are crazy if you think Russia going to lay down a carrier of this size in even 2025.

    They have no escorts for it and no bases suitable for it. A carrier of this size does not exist on it's own. None of the support structure is up, the figthers wings havenb't even been started.

    If Russia planned to lay it down they would have started on everything lese they need first for it and they haven't.
    avatar
    JohninMK

    Posts : 5467
    Points : 5530
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  JohninMK on 29/06/17, 02:17 am

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:Russia will have one Project 23000 aircraft carrier of 90000-100000 tons.

    Tsavo Lion posted two very interesting news

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6686p400-russian-navy-status-news-3#198032

    http://www.ng.ru/news/585912.html?print=Y
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ng.ru%2Fnews%2F585912.html%3Fprint%3DY

    https://utro.ru/articles/2017/06/28/1331900.shtml
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Futro.ru%2Farticles%2F2017%2F06%2F28%2F1331900.shtml

    The first unit of the Project 23000 will be included in the State Armament Program 2018-2025.

    No they are developing the plans by 2025. They will not start construction of the thing until at earliest 2027 and this thing would take a good decade going by Russi'a build rates to even hit the water.

    You are crazy if you think Russia going to lay down a carrier of this size in even 2025.

    They have no escorts for it and no bases suitable for it. A carrier of this size does not exist on it's own. None of the support structure is up, the figthers wings havenb't even been started.

    If Russia planned to lay it down they would have started on everything lese they need first for it and they haven't.
    They don't have an operational requirement for it yet either. Much better to let the World's debt crisis settle down over the next few years first.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1922
    Points : 1947
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  eehnie on 29/06/17, 02:38 am

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:Russia will have one Project 23000 aircraft carrier of 90000-100000 tons.

    Tsavo Lion posted two very interesting news

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6686p400-russian-navy-status-news-3#198032

    http://www.ng.ru/news/585912.html?print=Y
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ng.ru%2Fnews%2F585912.html%3Fprint%3DY

    https://utro.ru/articles/2017/06/28/1331900.shtml
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Futro.ru%2Farticles%2F2017%2F06%2F28%2F1331900.shtml

    The first unit of the Project 23000 will be included in the State Armament Program 2018-2025.

    No they are developing the plans by 2025. They will not start construction of the thing until at earliest 2027 and this thing would take a good decade going by Russi'a build rates to even hit the water.

    You are crazy if you think Russia going to lay down a carrier of this size in even 2025.

    They have no escorts for it and no bases suitable for it. A carrier of this size does not exist on it's own. None of the support structure is up, the figthers wings havenb't even been started.

    If Russia planned to lay it down they would have started on everything lese they need first for it and they haven't.

    According to the Maritime Doctrine 2015 of the Russian Federation, a project of Aircraft Carrier will be ready by 2020. I quoted it several times in this forum. Likely also in this topic.

    Now we know at least one of the future "aircraft carriers" (quoting the document) will be of the Project 23000. Something that I discussed also here, and finally is confirmed to be right.

    The production of the first unit will begin then (around 2020), according again with the cited document. And is not clear still but I expect can be ready by the end of 2025, to be in the Top of the generation of Russian armament developed in the First Quarter of the Century.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5695
    Points : 5736
    Join date : 2015-09-03
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Militarov on 29/06/17, 02:59 am

    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:Russia will have one Project 23000 aircraft carrier of 90000-100000 tons.

    Tsavo Lion posted two very interesting news

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6686p400-russian-navy-status-news-3#198032

    http://www.ng.ru/news/585912.html?print=Y
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ng.ru%2Fnews%2F585912.html%3Fprint%3DY

    https://utro.ru/articles/2017/06/28/1331900.shtml
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Futro.ru%2Farticles%2F2017%2F06%2F28%2F1331900.shtml

    The first unit of the Project 23000 will be included in the State Armament Program 2018-2025.

    No they are developing the plans by 2025. They will not start construction of the thing until at earliest 2027 and this thing would take a good decade going by Russi'a build rates to even hit the water.

    You are crazy if you think Russia going to lay down a carrier of this size in even 2025.

    They have no escorts for it and no bases suitable for it. A carrier of this size does not exist on it's own. None of the support structure is up, the figthers wings havenb't even been started.

    If Russia planned to lay it down they would have started on everything lese they need first for it and they haven't.

    They might lay it in 2020+ but it then wont be completed in at least 8 or even 10 years. Squadrons in that case would need to start forming in 2020. at least. When its about escort, seems it would fall completely on Nakhimov and Grigorovich class as nothing else adequate is on horizont till Lider comes (if).
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5695
    Points : 5736
    Join date : 2015-09-03
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Militarov on 29/06/17, 03:00 am

    eehnie wrote:
    SeigSoloyvov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:Russia will have one Project 23000 aircraft carrier of 90000-100000 tons.

    Tsavo Lion posted two very interesting news

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t6686p400-russian-navy-status-news-3#198032

    http://www.ng.ru/news/585912.html?print=Y
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ng.ru%2Fnews%2F585912.html%3Fprint%3DY

    https://utro.ru/articles/2017/06/28/1331900.shtml
    https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=es&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Futro.ru%2Farticles%2F2017%2F06%2F28%2F1331900.shtml

    The first unit of the Project 23000 will be included in the State Armament Program 2018-2025.

    No they are developing the plans by 2025. They will not start construction of the thing until at earliest 2027 and this thing would take a good decade going by Russi'a build rates to even hit the water.

    You are crazy if you think Russia going to lay down a carrier of this size in even 2025.

    They have no escorts for it and no bases suitable for it. A carrier of this size does not exist on it's own. None of the support structure is up, the figthers wings havenb't even been started.

    If Russia planned to lay it down they would have started on everything lese they need first for it and they haven't.

    According to the Maritime Doctrine 2015 of the Russian Federation, a project of Aircraft Carrier will be ready by 2020. I quoted it several times in this forum. Likely also in this topic.

    Now we know at least one of the future "aircraft carriers" (quoting the document) will be of the Project 23000. Something that I discussed also here, and finally is confirmed to be right.

    The production of the first unit will begin then (around 2020), according again with the cited document. And is not clear still but I expect can be ready by the end of 2025, to be in the Top of the generation of Russian armament developed in the First Quarter of the Century.

    5 years for P.23000? Not even in craziest dreams.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Future russian aircraft carriers. #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is 19/02/18, 08:34 am